Archives for July 2018

It’s coming fast and furious now. Are we seeing the beginning of the end?

Let’s see, where to begin:
– The White House released a doctored transcript of the meeting in Helsinki. They left out part of the question asked by the reporter as to whether Putin wanted Trump to win and did anyone in Russia help. Just in case anyone thinks it was a mistake they also doctored the video. The Kremlin cut out the whole question.
– The Kremlin also said that Trump promised in his one on one that no other America other than the translator was present for, which the Republicans have blocked from having her tell what she remembers, that he agreed to have the U.S. be on the same side as the Russians in Syria. The commander in the field says he knows of no such thing and hasn’t been told. The Russians have now publicly attacked that commander in the press. This is standard Russian disinformation. It’s an attempt to drive a wedge between the commander in chief and his general. But we don’t know what was said in that meeting. We know both the Kremlin and the White House lied about what was said in public so there’s no way we are going to know. Nice. Just as predicted btw.
– Trump also had a rally and told his supporters not to listen, read or believe anything that was said except directly from him (or something like that.) Quotes from 1984 immediately started being circulated.
– Sean Spicer released a book. It’s not doing well. Surprise. One person said that Spicer at least seemed pained when he had to lie. Sanders doesn’t.
– Speaking of Sarah it will be interesting to see what she says about all this. NOT!
– Trump signed a bill giving farmers billions of dollars. Why? They’ve been hurt by his trade policies.
– Meanwhile the deadline looms to reunite children separated from their parents. The administration is dealing with the little kids that were supposed to be reunited already with their parents. Some 450 were declared “ineligible.” What does that mean? I suspect it means the administration can’t find the parents. Most likely because they have already deported them. What to do? I like the idea of locking up the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Health and Human Services until all the kids are reunited. Nothing like time in jail to motivate one (so I am told.)
– Manafort’s lawyers have been asking for all kinds of pre-trial motions. They have lost all of them but one. They asked for a four month delay; they got a week. Jury selection should have started.
– Late yesterday one of the 12 Cohen tapes was released. At first it seems like nothing. Then you get some analysis and you begin to understand what is going on. Cohen and Trump are talking. Someone else comes in the room and gives someone a coke. There’s a phone call and what else? The conversation starts with Cohen telling Trump his poll numbers are good. They discuss setting up a company and Trump’s lawyer, who was also Trump’s dad’s lawyer, has told Michael what to do to set up this company. Trump says the word “cash.” Cohen talks about “our friend David.” There is discussion about the company being used to funnel information and payment. They, Trump and Cohen. also talk about Trump’s first marriage and divorce and how they only need to keep it out of the papers for four months.
So what’s this all about? Supposedly it’s about setting up a company to pay off the Playboy bunny who had a year long affair with Trump. “David” is speculated to be either the David who runs the National Enquirer who is said to be the one who paid the bunny for her story and buried it, or it is the phony name used in the agreement so that Trump’s name doesn’t appear on the document. I suspect it’s the phony name because of the use of the term “our friend.” If it had been the Enquirer guy I think Cohen would have said David straight up, or David and the fellow’s last name. Others have heard it differently.
Why is the tape coming out now? And, who released it?
Speculation is that it was Trump’s lawyers who released the tape. Why? To get ahead of the story (whatever that means.) It seems they knew the FBI had seized the tapes and they knew what was on this tape.
What we now know is that two months before the election Trump and Cohen were talking about hush money payments and that it was done in the context of effecting the campaign. Legal minds say the tape in and of itself is not enough to make the case of illegality. Really? We’ve got Cohen starting by talking about a poll, thus this is a political discussion. We have them saying they only need to keep his first divorce out of the papers for four months ie past the election. We have Trump saying, “cash,” as in “pay her in cash.” We have the two of them talking about setting up a company to route the money and “information.” There is no reason to set up a company unless you are trying to hide the source of the money. You have the president saying he knew nothing about this, that there was no affair, and that he knew nothing about payments. All lies.
Therefore this is an illegal campaign contribution. This is conspiracy. This is collusion. This is obstruction of justice. Next.

Paul Manafort’s trial delay. Wanna know one of the reasons he wanted the delay? He didn’t want to pay his accountant. Yeah, that’s right. His accountant didn’t get paid and therefore won’t share his financial records with him. Manafort hoped to stall until the prosecution turned over the records to him in the discovery part of the trial.

Speaking of not paying – Michael Cohen wasn’t by Trump. Seems to be a habit with these folks.

Ivanka is shutting down some of her businesses. She says to concentrate on her government job. I say becuase her crap wasn’t selling.

Well, okay. Did anything happen recently?
Hum, let’s see:
The president revoked, or said he was going to revoke, the security clearances on six people who have left government service. Two of them don’t have security clearance, so good luck with that.
He also threatened Iran with nuclear war.
His trade war is heating up, hurting more U.S. companies and individuals.
There’s continuing blowback from his Appeasement Summit in Helsinki,
His former campaign manager has his trial delayed a week.
His former personal lawyer and best bootlicker has 10? 11? 12? audio tapes that are being allowed as evidence and at least one has Trump talking about paying off a Playboy bunny he had an affair with.
Five witnesses have been identified as being given immunity in the Manafort trial: four were involved in his financial dealings. I forget what the fifth one was doing with Paulie.
35 people have now been indicted under the Mueller probe.
A separate proceeding is going on over an alleged unregistered foreign agent.
Mueller is now closing in on U.S. citizens involved in the Russia scandal and many think that may include the president, and they further speculate that this is what drove his many erratic tweets this weekend, including the one threatening Iran with total destruction (or whatever.)
Sarah Yuckabee Sanders said the president was revoking those security clearances because he doesn’t think these people should be profiting by giving their opinions based on years of service to the country.
Oh yeah, then there’s the FISA application on Carter Page. Republicans and Trump were jumping up and down saying if only we could see the application we would see it was all a witch hunt. That Page was not under suspicion of being an agent for the Russians and that the charges or suspicions were spurious. The application was released. It’s redacted. and the Republicans and Trump are jumping up and down saying, “See, this proves everything we’ve been saying!”
There’s only one problem with the claims they make about the FISA application. IF YOU READ the application you discover that THEY ARE LYING. Not a little bit, a lot, out and out lying. There is no other way to put it. The big deal memo that Devin Nunes wrote that kicked this all off is an OUT and OUT LIE.
The means THE pRESIDENT IS LYING. Shocking.

Okay, let’s look at the effect of some of these things:
The people who are being threatened with loss of security clearances retain them to be able to talk to their counterparts who are still active. By removing their clearances the president is WEAKENING our intelligence community and our National Security. This will play well with Vladimir Putin. These are people who either were investigating the president or have spoken up as private citizens in contradiction and or opposition to many of the president’s actions. This is purely politically based. This is dangerous. It is not in the interest of our country. And Andrew McCabe? Wasn’t it enough to fire him days before getting his pension? I mean – How much of a dick do you need to be?

Also, Trump’s family and friends are not waiting to take advantage of their positions in government; they and the president are cashing in right now. The cabinet is full of unsavory grifters. And Trump wants to calim he’s revoking clearances to people who have given their lives to protecting this country?

The Mueller probe is closing in, and it seems the president is feeling the heat. But what does he have to worry about? He says there’s no collusion, although all the evidence says otherwise.
There is a moment just before an animal is killed, by say a car running them over, where the animal realizes “Oh” and then it’s all over.
Are we seeing the steamroller heading for the president?
I’m thinking so.
Then we’ll have to deal with the next idiot.

There has been a lot of talk about what Putin may have on Trump.
Jennifer Palmieri, Hillary Clinton’s Director of Communications, put it best when she said, “Don’t look too deep when you are examining Trump.”
That is good advice, because you don’t have to look very deep. In fact, all you have to do is look at what is in front of your face.
To wit, ask yourself, “What do we know?”
In other words what are we absolutely sure of when it comes to Trump and his relationship with Putin and Russians, and then ask yourself, “What can we conclude from what we know?”

I recently received an email that reminded me of Trump’s business dealings with Russia, with Russians, and with Putin. If you look at his dealings with Russian and Russians there is a clear pattern and evidence that Trump , and Trump Jr., got money from Russians, a lot of money. The Russians bought houses at inflated prices. They invested heavily in his real estate projects. They bought into his condos. Many of these people are associated with the Russian mob, and or with Vladimir Putin. This is not a question for debate; this is known provable fact.
Who financed Trump? Trump Jr. has famously said that they got their money from Russia. It is also known and provable that they did so after the Trump family had many failed and bankrupted (or near bankrupted) businesses back in the 90s and no western bank would loan them money. Except, maybe, Deutschebank and that appears to be via the son of the retiring Supreme Court justice’s son and only after a large amount of money was invested in the bank via Russia.
We also know that nothing happens in Russia these days without Putin’s knowledge.
Now we get to Bill Browder and the Magnitsky Act. Browder is one of those characters that would never be allowed into a movie script because no one would believe such a person exists. His grandfather was a Communist, headed the American Communist Party for years and ran twice for President. The grandfather had deep ties to Russia. Bill’s dad and brothers are math whizzes and have nothing to do with Russia. Bill got into investing in Russia in 1996 with a stake of $25 million. He made a lot of money. This was at the same time Putin was rising rapidly through the political system. At one point they worked together on financial stuff. They then didn’t. It is well known that once Putin got into power he began to shakedown various rich people in Russia. One person he put in jail. Once that happened it is reported that the others asked Putin what he wanted and it is reported that he said 50%. I suspect that Browder was approached by Putin and he balked.
Browder was barred from entering Russia. His people were harassed both physically and any other way the Russians under Putin could dream up. One of them was his lawyer named Magnitsky, who was jailed and died while in police custody. Typically, that’s enough in Putin’s Russia for people to fall in line. By this time Browder had moved his operation to London, had renounced his U.S. citizenship and become a British citizen. (Why he switched citizenships has never really been explained.) We do know that in 2006 he wrote a book very complimentary of Putin.
After Magnitsky died, Browder got an act of Congress passed which allows the government to freeze the assets of people from Russis who violate human rights, and ban them from entering the country.
Consider this, recently Jeff Bezos was declared the richest man in the world at $150B. Vladimir Putin is thought to be worth $200B. All of it from ill gotten gains. Most of his money is invested in the west. The Magnitsky Act is a terrible impediment to his plans and his fortune. Most, or all of it, at least all that is in the west could be seized. Putin and his cronies have used all sorts of schemes to get their money out of Russia. This would include the money laundering of Wilbur Mills at Cyprus Bank, Paul Manafort, Donald Trump, Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner and his family to name a few that come immediately to mind. The Magnitsky Act threatens all of that. The meeting in Trump Tower was first and foremost about the Magnitsky Act, at least as far as what the Russians wanted to get out of the meeting. When the Magnitsky Act was passed Putin forbade disabled Russian children to be adopted by folks in the U.S. This was supposed to be a punishment to the west. Think about that. These children were disabled and Russia did not have the facilities or knowhow to care for them. There were folks in the U.S. willing to take on that burden and Putin said no. No to these disabled kids, Russian children. What a guy! So yes, the meeting was about adoptions, but what were the Russians offering for Trump to take the meeting? Dirt on Hillary. Emails they had stolen.
So, we know that Trump has done deals that look like and quack like – classic money laundering. We know that Russians loaned him money when no one else would. We know he went to Russia and held a beauty pageant there. Anyone who goes to Russia is followed, photographed and recorded. This is common knowledge.
The head of Fusion GPS, Glenn Simpson, testified to Congress. He had been hired by a Republican to do research on Trump. Trump at the time was a candidate, and not that much was known about him. Simpson’s specialty is gathering all the public information on the topic he is asked to look into. He wasn’t asked to get dirt on Trump; he was asked to do basic research to answer the question, “who is this guy?”
There is a lot of public information on Trump: books, court cases, newspaper accounts. etc. Simpson gathered it all up and read it. He kept wondering what Trump was doing in Russia? He discovered that Donald spent a lot of time there, but unlike other places he had no deals to speak of. There was no public record to speak of. That is when Simpson went to Steele and asked him to look into Trump in Russia. There was no “get dirt on Trump” or anything like that. It was just – find out whatever you can. When Steele started people in Russia were willing to talk about Trump. His business was an open secret, or rather his shenanigans. Steele wrote up what he discovered in 16 reports to Simpson. This became the Steele Dossier. What he heard was startling and he was concerned that he was witnessing “a crime in progress.” Eventually, he told contacts he had in the FBI what he had heard.
So why is Trump so fawning over Putin? Why is he so obsequious? It’s because he owes Putin a bundle of money and because Putin has damaging recordings of whatever Donald was doing when he was in Russia – that’s why. Okay, that’s just an opinion, but all the evidence, the facts, and Donald’s behavior point to that. There is no other explanation. Period. Full Stop. If anyone else has a better explanation I’d like to hear it.
But the evidence, right in front of our face, is very clear.

Yesterday the New York Times released 400 pages of documentation they received under the Freedom of Information of Act concerning the FBI’s wiretapping warrant application of Carter Page. Page was connected to the Trump campaign and had made numerous trips to Russia before and during the campaign. He made claims of having some sort of access to Russian officials. The FBI had reason to believe he was working for the Russian government either unwittingly or knowingly, and this suspicion went back before the Trump campaign.
At the time of the warrant application during the campaign Republicans claimed that the FBI had acted improperly, that this was an attempt by some to discredit the campaign, etc. etc. etc. Devin Nunes wrote a very controversial memo saying so. Democrats on the committee said that was not true and wanted to release their own memo, which was blocked from being released by Republicans until their was such a hew and cry that it got released too.
What this redacted information reveals is that not only were the Republican claims unfounded, but they did the very thing they accused the FBI and the Democrats of doing. According to Lawfare, a blog started in 2010 by Bush (W) appointee and law prof at UT Austin, a Wash Post reporter, and a Harvard prof I quote their analysis at the time that Nunes wrote his memo. They wrote that the FBI warrant application met the requirements for a wire tap and that the Nunes’ memo:

“tried to deceive the American people in precisely the same way that it falsely accused the FBI of deceiving the FISA Court.”

Their conclusion now, with the redacted version of the FISA application makes the Nunes’ memo look even worse. How can you look worse than what Lawfare all ready said? Leave it to our elected Republican officials to make a terrible situation worse!
One of the claims Nunes made was that the FBI had started the investigation based on the Steele Dossier (It hadn’t. In fact, the original application for wiretapping Page was made way before the Trump ever considered running for president and way before the Steele Dossier was written. The application that so upset the Republicans was asking for an extension on surveillance.)
Another claim was that the credibility of Steele was outlined in a footnote in the application, as if to suggest that the court wouldn’t read the footnote. The Lawfare folks said they had read many FISA applications and they said they knew that the court read the footnotes. Besides, the footnote took up over a page. It’s not like they wouldn’t see it! But this was a big problem for Nunes and his gang (ie Trey Gowdy.)
It is also worth noting that there is noted that two Russians plead guilty to being unregistered foreign agents and one of them, a banker, spent 30 months in jail. I presume these are the two who were caught talking about Page as an asset and the two were worried that Page might go to someone actually connected to the program the two Ruskies were duping Page into believing he was participating in. (They finally decided that wasn’t a problem because, they concluded, Page was that stupid.)
If you spend anytime studying how the Russian government works in these situation you will discover that they frequently use “private citizens” (ie unregistered foreign agents) to do their work. This gives them a level of deniability. One only has to listen to Vladimir Putin in the Helsinki summit saying that the Russian government wasn’t involved in interfering in the 2016 election. The people who were, they were private Russian citizens. They were bankers. (Bankers of banks that Putin has control over and take their orders directly from Putin.) Some were GRU military officials carrying out a military campaign, but who wants to talk about that? (Me! Me! Me!)
Let us not forget that the judges who signed off on the warrant were all appointees of Republican presidents. Four judges, two appointed by W, one by H.W., one by Reagan.
We have been attacked and invaded by a hostile foreign power. One party is denying it and aiding and abetting in a coverup of that fact. Let us not forget that.
This is not about politics as much as it is about patriotism.
There is little that I have ever agreed with Rick Perry about, but one thing he said that I have always respected him for saying, “Stand up for what you believe in.”
It is time to stand up.

That’s the reason my congressman, Dave Brat, says I should vote for him.

I have to wonder what are Good Conservative Principles?

The word “conserve” means to not waste, to use only what you need to use. People who claim to be conservatives don’t do that. They spend. They spend more than others, a lot more. So what are these Good Conservative Principles? I have so far failed to discover any that make sense; that help, as they claim, the average person; or, that are in line with what the majority of people in this country want. If anyone can give me an example of a “Good Conservative Principle” that do any of the positive things I’ve mentioned; I’d like to see it.
There was a chart that some of my right wing friends were posting showing the difference – they claimed – between Republicans and Democrats. Republicans were for lower taxes (who isn’t?) Dems, they claimed, were for higher taxes. Dems are in favor of paying for what they are spending, and reducing the deficit. If you are getting lower taxes but increasing the debt that is, in principle, a bad thing. Republicans, since and including Reagan, have claimed to cut taxes (they have for the wealthy, not for everyone else) but they did so by increasing the deficit. if you look at the party that spends less and decreases the deficit it’s the Democrats – by a long shot.
So where’s the Good Conservative Principle?

Dave Brat claims to know economics. He has a masters in Divinity. He has an BA from Hope College. Ever heard of Hope? Last time I heard of Hope it was a town in Arkansas that Bill Clinton was from. Brat got a Phd in Econ from American and has been associated with the ultra conservative econ folks that keep pushing out of favor and debunked economic arguments that appear to be more for political gain among a narrow segment of people (the very wealthy) than they do for economic gain for the general population (Read Nancy Maclean’s Democracy in Chains: The Deep History of the Radical Right’s Stealth Plan for America.) for more on the topic.

What other Good Conservative Principles are there?
– Defend the Second amendment no matter what,
– Push anti-abortion,
– Kill health care. To quote “Let Obamacare implode and then get people in there who know what they are doing.” To which I say, “Really?” He’s been asked, “Why not fix it?” (answer “You can’t.” No explanation. When you mention the word “Obamacare” the staffers go blank, stonewall, won’t discuss anything after that.)

Then I have to wonder, “Who are the people ‘who know what they are doing’ that you would bring in?” Obama took a Heritage Foundation idea and ran with it. Got the guy who implemented Massachusetts’ health care under Romney, and held countless hearings in Congress. He gave in to every objection the Republicans had, and when it came to the vote the Republicans, every one of them, voted against it. Once implemented what did they object to in the bill? Why the very things they insisted be put in.

As far as anti-abortion goes, I don’t get the zealousness. Especially by people who don’t have a vagina. Do they not remember what it was like in this country before Roe v Wade? An abortion is a simple procedure if done early. Forcing women to have children they don’t want is not good for the women, the children, or the society. Malcolm Gladwell showed that in fact the drop in crime, 18 to 20 years after Roe v Wade was passed, was due to the fact that so many unwanted children were not born. (This has been argued since, but I haven’t seen any compelling argument that says it isn’t true. I have seen lots of police chiefs claim it was their policies that changed things, but they can’t back that up with a cause and effect analysis.)

Protect the Second Amendment? This is touchy ground for some. Not for me. I’m tired of seeing people slaughtered in our country because someone with a mental problem, a grudge, a social slight and decides to get a weapon and kill as many people as possible. Especially, when ever other country in the world has figured out a solution. It’s time to get with the 20th century or dare I say the 21st? Do we really need to so jealously guard an amendment that was put in the Constitution so that slave owners could threaten their slaves? Or was it so minutemen could keep their flintlocks over the fireplace and carry them to an assembly point to fight the British regulars? How’s that gonna work out in the day of drones and missiles? Oh wait, you need them for personal protection. Yeah. Sorry. No. ( See solutions other countries have come up with for that. It’s easy. Safe, not hard to do. Of course, if you have a gun in your house you are statistically more likely to get shot. Wonder why? If you are a woman it is more likely that your significant other will use it on you. )

So what are these “Good Conservative Principles”?

You can look up Dave Brat and listen to some of his explanations. The ones with Katy Tur are good. They are posted by some group that headlines them with stuff like “Dave Brat schools Katy Tur.” If you listen to what he says there’s an illogic to it. There’s a economic magic wand that gets waved. Yet the headline screams that Katy gets schooled. In fact, she asks a question; he doesn’t answer it; she asks it again. A variant is he answers it; she hold up the mirror; he waves the magic wand. By magic wand, let me be clear, he makes a statement and then says such and such will follow due to his previous statement, but there is no correlation. It’s the old joke of the two scientists in white lab coats in front of a double row of blackboards covered with equations. One of them says, “and then a miracle happens.”

Let me give you an example:
Brat says we need to give more money to big corporation so they’ll invest in America and wages will go up.
Tur asks why do they need more capital? They are sitting on a ton of cash right now. Why not use some of the cash they have to pay their works right now?
Brat repeats what he said above in some variant.

Tur is quoting from standard proven economic 101. If you give people money they will spend it and the economy will improve. Brat is quoting an economic idea but he skips the first step. He is saying that if companies invest that will improve the economy. It will. It will create jobs to build the stuff that will create the stuff that people will buy. However, the point Brat misses (doesn’t understand? Glosses over?) is that companies invest when there is demand. If there is no demand they don’t invest. This isn’t some highly technical analysis that folks can’t grasp. This is basic. “I ain’t gonna build a widget factory if no one wants widgets.”
How do you create demand? You figure out how people get money and let them get it. A great way to do that is to increase wages. A simple way for politicians to helo is to increase the minimum wage. Another better way is to support unions that allow them to be an economic force to bargain for a large group of people. For some reason Mr. Brat is opposed to these simple ideas. In other words, Dave Brat is opposed – economically – to directly helping the average guy.

Why would that be? Would it be because of those huge donations he got from big business that don’t like unions because they would have to pay more in wages? Is it because Republicans who represent the interests of business and the wealthy don’t like to increase the minimum wage because they don’t want to pay more? Even though it’s been shown, over and over again, that if people have more money the economy improves and the amount the rich and the companies would make would be greater than if the people didn’t have that money.

Another thing to consider from an economic stand point and from a misogynist (ie anti-woman) standpoint is that being for anti-abortion means more people will be born and that those people will struggle for survival so that they will compete for the few jobs there are, and with no union to protect them they will have to accept whatever they are offered so it’s good for business to have a larger labor pool.
The Romans called the workers “proles.” This is where the word “proletariat” came from, or as the French said, “the sans-cullotte.” It was they that rose up against the French aristocracy.
Will we come to that? Will those oppressed say they’ve had enough? Will they stop taking the drugs they are addicted to, to stop the pain of their position in life, and will they take their guns off the wall and march on the rich hauling them out of their mansions and slaughtering them?
It is said that life imitates art (or is it the other way around? Or both?) There are more and more shows and movies with that as a theme. Watch out what you wish for.

Meanwhile in other news:
I am still smarting from the news that the 29 year old Russian spy, (sorry, I meant “unregistered agent”) was complaining to her handlers that she didn’t like cohabitating with q 56 year old man. This fills me with a certain sadness (ennui? I’ll go with ennui. It’s a word I don’t really know what it means but I think that’s what I’m feeling here.) Does that mean all those emails I got awhile back from “sexy Russian women” who wanted to get to know me weren’t real? Not that I want to cohabitat with a 29 year old, but I’d like to at least be considered, to be in the running, and not categorically excluded. Ah me. In the Mayan world there are many sculptures depicting an old man with a lecherous look on his face standing behind a young woman and reaching over her shoulder to pinch her nipple. Ah me. Is that where I am? OMG.

Mr. Trump has a new problem, (I know. Mind blowing.) Apparently, his old pal, enforcer, personal lawyer, fixer Michael Cohen has a tape that the FBI seized that has the two of them discussing how to pay a Playboy bunny for her silence on an affair Trump was having with her. This was in the August September timeframe before the election. For some reason the two of them thought it would be a good idea to not have it come out right before the election that he had been boffing a woman right after his wife had given birth to his son. Especially considering that he had brought up Bill Clinton’s affairs during his campaign. Imagine that? According to legal experts, like former prosecutors, this could be obstruction of justice, collusion, failure to declare a campaign contribution. etc. etc. etc. This btw is outside the purview of the Mueller investigation into Russian meddling in our 2016 election.

Also, next week Paul Manafort goes on trial. If found guilty, he could go to jail for 300 years. he may not make it out alive. The case is said to be rock solid and there are 500 pieces of evidence listed that can be used in the trial.

Also that Russian unregistered agent has been photographed with lots of Republicans and with all sort of gun rights mucketty mucks. No problem, right? Republican have always associated with Russian spies that are trying to undermine our democracy, right? I mean, remember their outrage at Hillary for even meeting with Putin? For bringing that silly “Reset” button that she probably picked up at Staples?

And now there is the excuse making by the White House on what Trump meant when he said the exact opposite. Many Republicans at least won’t defend it, some have. I watched a guy taking David Brooks place on the PBS evening hour defending the president. He was from the American Enterprise Institute and had an arabic sounding name (is this their token Muslim? I don’t know.) But the nonsense he was saying and the passion with which he was saying it was staggering. So staggering that both Mark Shields and Judy Woodruff were stunned. Shields finally asked him some pointed questions and yes the stupidity that this fellow was spouting was in fact what he wanted to stick to. The argument was something along the lines of “No one would do something this stupid unless it was like a Lil Abner reverse whammy. Besides, the president is only one person in the administration, and if you look at what the administration is really doing, they are tough on Russia, North Korea, etc.” Wow. Remember the folks who went ballistic on Obama when he told the Russian president (not Putin, his swithero patsy) that he’d have more room to negotiate after the election? Where are those guys now? Are they like this fellow with the “Trump must have a secret plan” crowd? OMG, we are doomed.

Then there’s Trump’s pick for Supreme Court. Not only is he against abortion, for slaughter in our streets (I mean unfettered access for everyone to weapons), but he’s a big believer in the idea that a president can’t be arrested while in office, can’t be brought in to testify, or have a case brought against him either criminally or civilly. Why would Trump pick someone like that?

Oh wait. I know. I know. He’s a treasonous Russian agent and he wants to keep destroying our country for as long as he can while enriching himself, and this judge would let him do it.

But that’s just my opinion, and the opinion that a lot of people are coming to, like suburban woman, millennials, and dare I say a few Republicans in Congress?

There’s a fascination with the polls on Trump. His numbers stay about the same and the speculation is why? Why indeed. The explanations I like the best (not saying they are true) is:
– The Trumpers who no longer support him don’t want to tell the pollsters that.
– The Trumpers who still support him, aren’t listening to reality, and btw probably never have.*
* These people are oftentimes referred to as those who watch Fox News.

Hum, that wraps up the poll explanations.

What else we got? Oh yeah, Sarah Sanders. She said the President was saying no, not to the question he was being asked ie “Do you believe that Russia is still meddling in our elections?” but rather he was saying no tow times to mean he wasn’t taking anymore questions.
Unfortunately for SHS the White House released their transcript of what was said. Both times when he said, “No,” It was in answer to the question of did he believe Russia was still meddling in our election.
I am constantly amazed how someone can lie, day after day, for this man.

Let’s look at the meddling issue (What else you got to do? Shut up.)
It has been reported that Russia is still attacking our elections. This by the intelligence community, and the FBI. Donald Trump has said they aren’t the only ones. He’s right! There are also the Iranians, the Chinese, and the North Koreans. All are trying to attack us cyberly. Russia is doing it on an industrial scale. Recently, reports have surfaced that Iran has stepped up it’s game in this regard. What are we doing? Nothing.
That isn’t true. Hold on. Republicans voted en masse against a bill to fund efforts to stop cyber meddling. Good work Dave Brat! What a patriot.
But why should these folks stop meddling? There’s really no penalty for it. Not with this administration. This brings me to the point about these conservatives and their principles. It reminds me of my son’s miniature dachshund: all tough and yappy as long as he was behind glass or six feet away form another bigger dog, but once that big dog moved in closer – I remember one time with the big dog kind of indicating, “Wanna play?” my son’s dog would run back cowardly until he was far enough away (about six or eight feet) then he’d bark and run forward on the attack, only to turn tail a few feet into the attack and go back to where he’s bark and begin his attack again.
These get tough hard-liner are all yappy when they aren’t in a position to do anything. Once in place where they could they placate, flip-flop (remember how bad that was?) and completely change their positions (Roll the HMS Pinafore music please: “Oh no I didn’t!” “Oh really?” “Well, not completely!”).
[Exit stage left. Lights out.]

ps Then there’s Roger Stone. He’s back in the news, this time with the former NYC madam that got Eric Schneiderman in trouble. Roger also got Al Franken in trouble. Roger has been doing dirty tricks for Republicans for decades. He kinda had a fall from grace when it was revealed he was advertising in a swingers’ magazine. Roger and sex seem to be tightly coupled (Get it? Ha ha!) He likes to get other folks in trouble over it. And there’s some connection to Trump on all this. Who would have thought? (Me! Me! Me!)